Forced Damped Oscillator frequency independent quantaties

AI Thread Summary
In the discussion about the forced damped oscillator, the focus is on demonstrating that the displacement amplitude at low frequencies, the velocity amplitude at resonance, and the acceleration amplitude at high frequencies are frequency independent. The approach involves using the derived formula for amplitude and applying approximations based on the frequency conditions. For low frequencies, the displacement amplitude simplifies as frequency approaches zero, while at resonance, the velocity amplitude is evaluated at the natural frequency. At very high frequencies, the acceleration amplitude is analyzed as frequency approaches infinity. Understanding these concepts requires recognizing when to use expansions and approximations to simplify calculations effectively.
mbigras
Messages
61
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


For the forced damped oscillator, show that the following are frequency independent.
a) displacement amplitude at low frequencies.
b) the velocity amplitude at velocity resonance.
c) the acceleration amplitude at very high frequencies



Homework Equations


<br /> A(\omega) = <br /> \frac<br /> {F_{0}}<br /> {m}<br /> \frac<br /> {1}<br /> {\left(\left(\omega_{0}^{2}-\omega^{2}\right)^{2}+\left(\frac{\omega_{0}}{Q} \omega\right)^{2}\right)^{1/2}}<br /> \\<br /> x = A \cos(\omega t + \alpha)\\<br /> \\<br /> Q = \omega_{0}/\gamma\\<br /> \omega_{0} = \sqrt{\frac{k}{m}}<br />



The Attempt at a Solution


To find the velocity and acceleration we can take the derivative and second derivatve of x. The amplitudes are then (for displacement, velocity and acceleration):
<br /> A(\omega)\\<br /> -\omega A(\omega)\\<br /> -\omega^{2} A(\omega)<br />
Then the question asks me to show that the equations are frequency indepedent. What I'm most curious about is how to approach these questions. Every time I get one of these questions I experience a deer in the head lights effect. My general guess is that the structure of the question is:

Given an equation, a statement that you can use to make an approximation and a statement that you can use to find a point of interest:
Expand the equation about the point of interest, make an approximation and you'll see that the equation actually behaves in some useful way, or at least a way that makes a calculation easier.

Is this on the right track?

So part a, would I expand about 0, and use the approximation that \omega &lt;&lt; \omega_{0}? For part b, would I expand about \omega_{0}?

What does it mean to be frequency independent? Does that mean the frequency term will drop out?

This question has me confused, obviously, but what I think is more important is that it's the whole process that confuses me. I'd like some tips for how to approach these types of questions. Specifically, when to expand, what type of expansions to use, how to choose where your expanding about, and how to understand what your looking for.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You have the right idea in computig A, wA and w^2 A for displacement, velocity and acceleration respectively. But then you over-complicate the problem.

a) What is A(w) if w goes to zero? Use your formula you derived.
b) wht is wA when w approaches w0?
c) what is w^2 A when w approaches infinity?
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top